Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund 2012-2013 Request for Proposals (RFP) 145-I ENRTF ID: Project Title: Modern Microbiological Analysis of Public Drinking Water Supplies I. Water Resources Topic Area: Total Project Budget: $ 145,355 Proposed Project Time Period for the Funding Requested: 2 yrs, July 2013 - June 2015 Other Non-State Funds: $ 0 Summary: This project will determine the microbiological safety of a public water supply (that is not disinfected) from a small community in central Minnesota. Name: Timothy LaPara Sponsoring Organization: U of MN Address: 500 Pillsbury Dr SE Minneapolis MN 55455 Telephone Number: (612) 624-6028 Email lapar001@umn.edu Web Address www.ce.umn.edu Location Region: Central County Name: Crow Wing City / Township: _____ Funding Priorities _____ Multiple Benefits _____ Outcomes _____ Knowledge Base _____ Extent of Impact _____ Innovation _____ Scientific/Tech Basis _____ Urgency _____ Capacity Readiness _____ Leverage _____ Employment _______ TOTAL ______% 05/03/2012 Page 1 of 6
Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (ENRTF) 2012 ‐ 2013 Main Proposal PROJECT TITLE: Modern Microbiological Analysis of Public Drinking Water Supplies I. PROJECT STATEMENT Within the century, unrestricted access to safe drinking water has become an implicit expectation of modern society. Indeed, the National Academy of Engineering lists “Water Supply and Distribution” as the fourth-greatest achievement of the 20 th Century, just behind electrification, the automobile, and the airplane and just ahead of electronics, radio, and television (www.greatachievements.org). Prior to the last century, however, drinking water was often unsafe, possibly carrying deadly diseases, such as cholera, dysentery, and typhoid – diseases that are essentially unknown to modern-day Minnesotans. The principal technology that protects Minnesotans from these horrible diseases is drinking water disinfection; virtually all public drinking water supplies, therefore, are treated with either chlorine or chloramine to prevent the spread of dangerous microbial diseases. Since the 1970s, however, the scientific community has recognized a consequence of drinking water chlorination, in which the chlorine unexpectedly reacts with naturally-existing organic matter in the water to generate unwanted, cancer- causing compounds. This had led to a “drinking water paradox” in that the chlorine that protects us from horrible, deadly diseases (like cholera and dysentery) can actually cause a horrible, deadly disease like cancer (albeit much later in life). Although the disinfection of drinking water has continued (and will continue), substantial (and successful) efforts have been made to reduce the presence of these cancer- causing agents in Minnesota’s drinking water, the chlorination of drinking water will always lead to the generation of these compounds in our drinking water. Although most public drinking water supplies are disinfected, there are numerous examples in Minnesota in which public drinking water supplies are not chlorinated. These are almost all small, rural communities that use groundwater as a source-water (i.e., a surface water is never used as a source-water without disinfection). In these cases, public health is protected by the generally high quality of groundwater (wells are rarely contaminated by disease-causing microorganisms) and by microbiological monitoring for fecal coliforms (to detect the rare cases in which wells are contaminated). Fecal coliforms are bacteria that are easily detectable in water and suggest the presence of fecal material – thus they indicate the possible presence fecal organisms that might cause disease. In the unlikely occurrence that these small communities have fecal coliforms in their drinking water, they are then forced to disinfect their water to ensure that the water consumers are protected from microbiological diseases. It is clearly the ideal scenario for these small communities to provide microbiologically safe water without disinfection, as it avoids the potential hazards posed by disinfection by-products while reducing their cost to generate drinking water. Unfortunately, the approach behind detecting “fecal coliforms” is inherently flawed – it merely detects the possible presence of fecal material, which then reflects an increased likelihood of disease. A much better approach would be to directly detect specific disease-causing organisms to ensure that public health is protected. Unfortunately, these microbiological techniques have been developed only within the last 5-10 years (in the past, the fecal coliform test was the best available assay), such that there is a substantial gap in our knowledge and ability to protect public health with drinking water that are not disinfected. The goal of this project, therefore, is to provide a detailed microbiological analysis of a small, central Minnesota community water supply – both at the well and at the tap (note: the community has requested to remain anonymous). Because we will be directly detecting known pathogens, rather than merely an indicator of fecal material, we will be able to definitively assess the microbiological safety of this drinking water supply. This project, therefore, should lead to one of two outcomes: (1) the microbiological safety of this water will be confirmed, suggesting that chlorination is unnecessary, and (2) disease-causing organisms will be detected, demonstrating that the microbiological safety of this water is questionable and that this drinking water should be chlorinated to protect public health. The outcome of this research will have broad implications for the numerous small communities throughout Minnesota that provide drinking water to their citizens without chlorine or chloramine disinfection. 1 05/03/2012 Page 2 of 6
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES In this project, therefore, water samples will be collected monthly for a period of at least one year from two specific tap water locations (from one residence and from City Hall) from a small community in central Minnesota as well as directly from the City’s well. It is necessary to collect samples from these locations because the raw well-water might be microbiologically safe but then become contaminated as it is distributed throughout the City. Similar samples will also be collected from the City of St. Paul (a surface water source) and the City of Blaine (a groundwater source) to provide a basis of comparison for municipal water supplies that have been disinfected. Total genomic DNA will be extracted and purified from these samples and then used as template to quantify the following organisms by quantitative real- time PCR: adenovirus, hepatitis A virus, rotavirus, Escherichia coli , Enterrococcus spp., Bacteroides spp., and various genes that encode resistance to antibiotics. This research will allow us to confirm that the microbiological quality of this drinking water is safe for human consumption, which would be enormously beneficial for small communities using very quality groundwater as their source-water without the expense and concerns associated with chlorination. Activity 1: Sample collection and quantification of specific microbes Budget: $145,355 Include detailed description of the activity you are proposing to do here. Outcome Completion Date 1. Sample Collection July 2014 2. Genomic DNA extraction and purification August 2014 December 2014 3. Quantification of specific microorganisms by quantitative real-time PCR III. PROJECT STRATEGY A. Project Team/Partners Dr. Timothy M. LaPara (Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota) will be responsible for coordinating the entire project and co-mentoring of a graduate student (yet to be hired). Dr. LaPara has considerable expertise in municipal wastewater treatment, having published more than 40 manuscripts that have been published in the peer-reviewed literature. An anonymous City in central Minnesota will also participate and serve as a partner on this project. B. Timeline Requirements The first year of this project will be devoted to collecting (and preserving) water samples and training the graduate student on the techniques required to quantify the specified organisms. The second year will be devoted to quantifying the organisms of concern (this should take 3-6 months), collating the data and interpreting its meaning (this should take < 3 months), and sharing the results with interested end-user. We anticipate that, in addition to the unnamed participating community, the Minnesota Department of Health, numerous small communities that do not currently disinfect their public water supplies, and the Minnesota Rural Water Association. C. Long-Term Strategy and Future Funding Needs The proposed project will be completed within the two-year project period. Additional work could be carried out (at additional communities) in the future, with the cost borne by the individual communities (or other sources). 2 05/03/2012 Page 3 of 6
Recommend
More recommend
